On Wed, 1 Jan 2003, Michael Cardenas wrote: > People do break cyphers, by finding weaknesses in them. Are you saying > that you think that current cyphers are unbreakable? > > Also, what about using biological systems to create strong cyphers, > not to break them?
We do pretty good already don't we :-) > It seems that all of these analyses assume that an instruction is a > single mathematical operation in a turing machine. What if each > operation was something else? I refuse to believe that the human mind > is just a turing machine. I totally agree with that last statement! I think the path of computational neuro will be far more rewarding for you. There are a lot of things the biologists don't know and their thought process is completely different than a physicists. You need both to figure out how cells work. In addition to cell function, there's nerve electrical transmission, coding theory, and noise. From what I've seen, the noise is actually part of the signaling system - I don't think we fully understand all the info the cells are transmitting. Figuring out how to pick out the important parts to create a useful model is still a challenge. Seems to me that it'd be one you'd have fun working on :-) Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike
